A phase 1 clinical trial of vorinostat in combination with decitabine in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) may respond to treatment with epigenetic-modifying agents. Histone deacetylase inhibitors may synergize with hypomethylating agents. This phase 1 dose-escalation study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose, recommended phase 2 dose, safety and tolerability of vorinostat plus decitabine in patients with relapsed/refractory AML, newly-diagnosed AML, or intermediate- to high-grade MDS. Thirty-four patients received concurrent therapy with decitabine plus vorinostat and 37 received sequential therapy with decitabine followed by vorinostat. Twenty-nine patients had relapsed/refractory AML, 31 had untreated AML and 11 had MDS. The target maximum administered dose (MAD) of decitabine 20 mg/m(2) daily for 5 d plus vorinostat 400 mg/d for 14 d was achieved for concurrent and sequential schedules, with one dose-limiting toxicity (Grade 3 QTc prolongation) reported in the sequential arm. Common toxicities were haematological and gastrointestinal. Responses were observed more frequently at the MAD on the concurrent schedule compared with the sequential schedule in untreated AML (46% vs. 14%), relapsed/refractory AML (15% vs. 0%) and MDS (60% vs. 0%). Decitabine plus vorinostat given concurrently or sequentially appears to be safe and well-tolerated. Concurrent therapy shows promising clinical activity in AML or MDS, warranting further investigation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it